In addition to the other posts, I'd recommend learning an emerging technology. One where there are few, if any, experts available. Something like WAP (which relies on XML). Learn about generating WML (WAP's equivalent to XML) from Perl or Java.
Now, that's quite a bit of learning, as you'll need to learn Perl or Java (focus on Servlets or JSPs for Java--this is how server-side Java is usually done) in order to generate WAP.
Build a little application in your spare time that integrates stock quotes and Slashdot headlines. This will take a while. All told, if you're spending 2-4 hours a night on this, you're looking at 3-6 months, I would suspect (learning curve included). When you're done, start applying for jobs doing WAP programming. There aren't tons now, but it's growing exponentially. And the good thing is that there's a much higher demand than supply. Oh, and if they question your abilities, you also have a demo that fits in your pocket. Bring your mobile phone with you to the interview.
That's just one way. There are lots of emerging technologies. Of course, the problem with any emerging technologies is that they usually rely upon one or more established techologies. Don't be afraid to learn, though. Moving from C to Java might open your eyes up a little. And the move from C to Perl really isn't that great a leap.
They're sharper? Are you kidding me? Maybe you're thinking about non-DVI LCD panels. An LCD panel is significantly sharper than *any* CRT. There's nothing to focus on an LCD panel. So, inherently, there's nothing to go out of focus (unless your monitor has to recombine analogue feeds to get a digital signal...yech!).
DVI LCD panels are far easier on the eyes. They take up less room on your desktop. These are both very good reasons to get DVI LCD panels. On the downside, they're expensive, they're often not as large as CRT counterparts, they don't do as well in direct sunlight, the color is not as "true" as with CRTs, and they don't run in multiple resolutions (analogue ones will, but this guy is asking about DVI LCDs). But, please, don't give me this "they're sharper" BS.
Digitial Video Interface. No analogue. Most flat panels are designed to use analog outputs from your video card. The resulting digital -> analogue -> digital conversion potentially introduces a lot of noise into the picture. It's better to get a special video card (a DVI card) that outputs a digital signal directly. SGI's wide aspect ratio LCD panel used a DVI video card from Number Nine, for instance.
If you cut a Moebius strip down the middle, trying to cut it in two, you end up with a single Moebius strip that's twice as long and half as wide. Do it again, and it gets twice as long, again. There is a very strong correlation between Moebius strips and infinity.
I thought you were named after the industrial dish washers found in almost every restaurant in America. They were, coincidentally, an amalgamation of Horowitz and Bartok, I believe.
.NET consists of a lot of technologies. It is not directly analogous to Java. However, Java consists of a lot of technologies, too.
Here's my read:
C# ~= Java (~= means approximately equal to)
----------
C# provides a nice programming language that has built-in garbage collection and takes out a lot of the crap from C++. Java does this, too. C# has multiple inheritence. Java does not (and claims it is not a good thing). Java will soon be extended to allow template-like functionality (without the pain in the ass of templates). I believe C# has something like templates, too.
ASP.NET ~= JSP (and servlets)
---------------
ASP.NET (or whatever they've renamed ASP+) compiles code upon the first viewing. This speeds up ASP code tremendously, giving it equal or better performance than the best servlet containers.
COM ~= JavaBeans
I'm not familiar enough with.NET to know of they're modifying COM & remonickering it (sorry). But, basically, COM (or whatever it will be called in.NET) allows each language to call other languages with native speed. It doesn't support Java, although I'm sure some third party will add support. However, Java *requires* any parameters passed between Java & other code to be copied into or out of the JVM (the JVM can move data around without notice--think HotSpot dynamic optimizations). This means there will always be a performance impact when calling between Java and native code (using either.NET or JNI). JNI is Java's answer to calling native code (or having native code call Java).
SOAP ~= RMI and/or EJB
-----------
This said, SOAP will play an integral part of Java, too. SOAP is a Good Thing. CORBA is too much of a pain in the ass. RMI is Java-centric. And, for all EJB's promises, it's a pain in the ass to use non-Java code with it (basically it's just CORBA). So Java will have all three (RMI, EJB, & SOAP). By the way, Java's serialization mechanism is being changed to allow the serialization of objects as XML. This will play a big role in the integration of SOAP.
So in essence,.NET is very analogous to Java (or, at least, Java & its related technologies). Microsoft is not stupid. They realize Java is becoming a platform for networked & distributed apps, as well as for server-side code. They also see that client-side Java is getting much better, and they suspect (rightfully, I might add) that jdk1.4 will finally get client-side Java "right".
In other words,.NET is a platform. And Java, when combined with the J2EE technologies, is a platform, as well.
Jive sucks. Agreed. But, although I haven't looked at the sourcecode for Half-Full (or is it Glasscode?), I must say the user interface is quite unusable. To me, good code isn't just pretty to look at--it also has to be functional, and to function well. Half-full may well meet the first requirement (pretty to look at--although I simply don't know), but it fails miserably with the 2nd requirement.
Slashcode would be an example of very functional code that does *not* look pretty. It's the flip side of the coin.
Sorry to rain on your parade, nebby. But you need to study a little about user interface design.
The Applet-Desc Element
Java Web Start has support for launching Java Applets. This support provides easy migration of existing code to Java Web Start. An Applet is launched using the applet-desc element instead of the application-desc element. For example:
The JAR files that make up the Applet are described using the resources element as for applications. The documentBase must be provided explicitly since a JNLP file is not embedded in an HTML page. The rest of the attributes correspond to the respective HTML applet tag elements.
The main-class attribute is used instead of the code attribute. The main-class attribute is assigned the name of the Applet class (without the.class extension). This attribute can be omitted if the Applet class can be found from the Main-Class manifest entry in the main JAR file.
Note: Applets must be packaged in JAR files in order to work with Java Web Start.
I hope that helps. My original suspicions (that WebStart does support applets) is now confirmed.
First, I'd like to take issue with your comment about portability. Applets suck from a portability standpoint because Netscape has a stuffed implementation of the JVM. Use Sun's Java Plug-In. It works nice. And Java on almost every platform (even Mac, with MacOS X, but not yet BeOS) is pretty good. However...
Take a look at Sun's Java WebStart. It looks to be Sun's successor to applet technology.
The idea is basically to create a web-enabled application. It allows you to create full blown Java applications. Every time you run a WebStart application, it checks to see if there are updates for the.jar files on the web. If you're not connected, no problem--you just use the older.jar files. If you don't want to upgrade, find--you just click "no" when it asks you if you want the latest.jar files. Since the.jar files are cached locally, there's no horrendous download every time you run the application (as with applets). It's extremely easy to set up your application to be WebStart-enabled. And, I believe (but don't quote me on this one) that you can make your applets WebStart-enabled, too (adding caching to applets).
This might offend some of the readers of slashdot, but I don't think this comment was intended to be flamebait. At any rate, I think a lot of what the author was saying is *correct*.
Just because a message does not agree with yours does not make it flamebait.
I'm not sure what you mean when you say, "why do they continue to let WIPO take the actions that they do." ICANN is not in the business of policing WIPO. It is not their job.
However, this has gotten way off topic. If you want to carry this on further, e-mail me. My e-mail address is valid.
I am not trying to redefine the First Amendment. I am merely conveying the interpretation of the First Amendment handed down by our Supreme Court. This is how meaning is attached to our Articles of the Constitution. This is how our democracy works. Are you trying to redefine the First Amendment through??
As for disregarding wipo.org.uk, I said I was sorry. I meant it.
And as for my statement about ICANN, they have indeed taken this position. Now, that doesn't stop trademark holders from attempting to bully domain holders. Nor does it stop domain holders from giving in to their bullying. But it *is* their policy.
I'm sorry. I didn't read the wipo.org.uk site beyond the name. The name, "World Intellectual Piracy Organization", really did little for me than to discredit the idea. I am sorry for that; I should have read further.
But, please, don't go off on the First Amendment. TLDs really have nothing to do with that. As I stated in my prior reply, ICANN has already taken the stance that trademarks != rights to a TLD.
I'm sorry that an American citizen has to point that out to you. It's a shame, really, as I am currently a British resident. And it's rare that I come across a British citizen that is more arrogant and offensive than us Americans. I take my hat off to you for that.
You do realize that two companies in completely unrelated industries can share the same trademark, don't you? Look at the word trademark. A mark for a trade. For a specific trade. Trademarks only apply to the trade within which the business does work. Of course, if your business is sufficiently common, such as McDonalds (tm), the trademark can be successfully defended outside the trade. However, this is a fairly rare occurance in IP law. As an example, the word, "Nova", is trademarked by both General Motors (their car, the "no go", as it is translated from Spanish) and PBS (the science-oriented television show). Both were awarded trademarks because they are in completely different trades, and as such the trademarks would not be confused with one another.
As a result, how should the ICANN deal with two companies that wish to register the same domain name? They might both own the trademark to that name, but in different industries? Your suggestion for a.REG TLD simply won't work. ICANN holds the position that top level domains != trademarks. Now, WIPO is in the business of defending IP. So, if there is some ambiguity, they will try to help enforce the rights of the IP holder. But your argument simply doesn't hold water.
And, for the record, free speech laws in America do not include the right to slander a company or to dilute the efficacy of a trademark. This is fairly well established (i.e. I don't think the courts will be overturning precedent any time soon). An exception to this exception is in the case of satire (one of the strongest forms of free speech in America, I might add). This is because satire cannot be confused with serious dialogue; as such, satire does not constitute slander.
Cheers!
Now, as I understood it, WIPO does not have a policy of forcing the foreiture of domain names to trademark owners. They will do this, but it is not their policy.
There are accepted means of referencing web sites in academia. Just reference the website. If you're so arrogant to think your thesis will be read >6 months after you've graduated, then write the authors to see if you can have permission to include the text as an appendix. But, still, reference the website.
I got the e-mail from Egghead. And my card *was* used fraudulently on Nov. 6. I don't know if the two were related, but I strongly doubt Egghead's claims.
This guy has no clue. Carnegie Mellon is 10x the undergraduate university that MIT will ever be, at least in terms of the education it provides (there's something to be said about living in Boston instead of Pittsburg).
Look, I knew a couple of guys (one CS, one Mech E) that transferred from my school (Rice) to MIT. They both said their workloads dropped considerably, while their grades rose. They were very aware of the fact that they weren't getting the same education that they were getting at Rice. But, MIT has the name.
And one thing I've realized since I've graduated. There are only two other schools I've come across where the grads are as competent as my peers at Rice (truth be told, most of us Rice guys are complete goons socially, though). One is CMU. The other is Harvey Mudd College.
Yep. We did the same project at Rice Uiversity. Working with Yalnix. Given CMU's lead in kernel design, I'd suspect Rice modelled their course after CMU's. Great course, really. Between this and the compiler course (we built a funtional compiler), I have a much firmer understanding of what goes on under the covers. It was a bitch at the time, but I'm damned glad I have it under my belt now.
Hmm... A few examples from the XML world come to mind. XSL (MS has the patent, but has agreed to allow anyone to use it for free, and turned it over to W3C). XML Schemas (another MS invention that is now in the hands of W3C). SOAP (again...).
Look, MS has a long history of being the bad guys in a lot of areas. But XML is not one of those areas.
XML has some real deficiencies dealing with large binary data (I do a lot of work in the oil industry with seismic data, where a single data set can be hundreds of gigabytes). MS is trying to address this area, too, along with IBM (SOAP). Yeah, they're going to push the envelope with XML. If they didn't, we wouldn't have XSL and XML Schemas today. And if we were talking about any issue other than XML, I'd say this is probably a bad thing. But they have a real commitment in the XML world towards open standards bodies (W3C). Take it for face value. It's a good thing, for once...
My favorite quote on this subject goes something like, "HTML is not a subset of XML any more than a car is a subset of steel." XML is a meta-markup langauge--a language for describing markup languages. HTML is a markup language. HTML can be expressed as XML, but is not a subset of XML.
Slashdot Mirror
In addition to the other posts, I'd recommend learning an emerging technology. One where there are few, if any, experts available. Something like WAP (which relies on XML). Learn about generating WML (WAP's equivalent to XML) from Perl or Java.
Now, that's quite a bit of learning, as you'll need to learn Perl or Java (focus on Servlets or JSPs for Java--this is how server-side Java is usually done) in order to generate WAP.
Build a little application in your spare time that integrates stock quotes and Slashdot headlines. This will take a while. All told, if you're spending 2-4 hours a night on this, you're looking at 3-6 months, I would suspect (learning curve included). When you're done, start applying for jobs doing WAP programming. There aren't tons now, but it's growing exponentially. And the good thing is that there's a much higher demand than supply. Oh, and if they question your abilities, you also have a demo that fits in your pocket. Bring your mobile phone with you to the interview.
That's just one way. There are lots of emerging technologies. Of course, the problem with any emerging technologies is that they usually rely upon one or more established techologies. Don't be afraid to learn, though. Moving from C to Java might open your eyes up a little. And the move from C to Perl really isn't that great a leap.
They're sharper? Are you kidding me? Maybe you're thinking about non-DVI LCD panels. An LCD panel is significantly sharper than *any* CRT. There's nothing to focus on an LCD panel. So, inherently, there's nothing to go out of focus (unless your monitor has to recombine analogue feeds to get a digital signal...yech!).
DVI LCD panels are far easier on the eyes. They take up less room on your desktop. These are both very good reasons to get DVI LCD panels. On the downside, they're expensive, they're often not as large as CRT counterparts, they don't do as well in direct sunlight, the color is not as "true" as with CRTs, and they don't run in multiple resolutions (analogue ones will, but this guy is asking about DVI LCDs). But, please, don't give me this "they're sharper" BS.
Digitial Video Interface. No analogue. Most flat panels are designed to use analog outputs from your video card. The resulting digital -> analogue -> digital conversion potentially introduces a lot of noise into the picture. It's better to get a special video card (a DVI card) that outputs a digital signal directly. SGI's wide aspect ratio LCD panel used a DVI video card from Number Nine, for instance.
If you cut a Moebius strip down the middle, trying to cut it in two, you end up with a single Moebius strip that's twice as long and half as wide. Do it again, and it gets twice as long, again. There is a very strong correlation between Moebius strips and infinity.
I thought you were named after the industrial dish washers found in almost every restaurant in America. They were, coincidentally, an amalgamation of Horowitz and Bartok, I believe.
.NET consists of a lot of technologies. It is not directly analogous to Java. However, Java consists of a lot of technologies, too.
.NET ~= JSP (and servlets)
.NET (or whatever they've renamed ASP+) compiles code upon the first viewing. This speeds up ASP code tremendously, giving it equal or better performance than the best servlet containers.
.NET to know of they're modifying COM & remonickering it (sorry). But, basically, COM (or whatever it will be called in .NET) allows each language to call other languages with native speed. It doesn't support Java, although I'm sure some third party will add support. However, Java *requires* any parameters passed between Java & other code to be copied into or out of the JVM (the JVM can move data around without notice--think HotSpot dynamic optimizations). This means there will always be a performance impact when calling between Java and native code (using either .NET or JNI). JNI is Java's answer to calling native code (or having native code call Java).
.NET is very analogous to Java (or, at least, Java & its related technologies). Microsoft is not stupid. They realize Java is becoming a platform for networked & distributed apps, as well as for server-side code. They also see that client-side Java is getting much better, and they suspect (rightfully, I might add) that jdk1.4 will finally get client-side Java "right".
.NET is a platform. And Java, when combined with the J2EE technologies, is a platform, as well.
Here's my read:
C# ~= Java (~= means approximately equal to)
----------
C# provides a nice programming language that has built-in garbage collection and takes out a lot of the crap from C++. Java does this, too. C# has multiple inheritence. Java does not (and claims it is not a good thing). Java will soon be extended to allow template-like functionality (without the pain in the ass of templates). I believe C# has something like templates, too.
ASP
---------------
ASP
COM ~= JavaBeans
I'm not familiar enough with
SOAP ~= RMI and/or EJB
-----------
This said, SOAP will play an integral part of Java, too. SOAP is a Good Thing. CORBA is too much of a pain in the ass. RMI is Java-centric. And, for all EJB's promises, it's a pain in the ass to use non-Java code with it (basically it's just CORBA). So Java will have all three (RMI, EJB, & SOAP). By the way, Java's serialization mechanism is being changed to allow the serialization of objects as XML. This will play a big role in the integration of SOAP.
So in essence,
In other words,
Jive sucks. Agreed. But, although I haven't looked at the sourcecode for Half-Full (or is it Glasscode?), I must say the user interface is quite unusable. To me, good code isn't just pretty to look at--it also has to be functional, and to function well. Half-full may well meet the first requirement (pretty to look at--although I simply don't know), but it fails miserably with the 2nd requirement.
Slashcode would be an example of very functional code that does *not* look pretty. It's the flip side of the coin.
Sorry to rain on your parade, nebby. But you need to study a little about user interface design.
I just checked further into WebStart's capabilities for applets. Here it is, available from the developer's guide for WebStart:
.class extension). This attribute can be omitted if the Applet class can be found from the Main-Class manifest entry in the main JAR file.
The Applet-Desc Element
Java Web Start has support for launching Java Applets. This support provides easy migration of existing code to Java Web Start. An Applet is launched using the applet-desc element instead of the application-desc element. For example:
The JAR files that make up the Applet are described using the resources element as for applications. The documentBase must be provided explicitly since a JNLP file is not embedded in an HTML page. The rest of the attributes correspond to the respective HTML applet tag elements.
The main-class attribute is used instead of the code attribute. The main-class attribute is assigned the name of the Applet class (without the
Note: Applets must be packaged in JAR files in order to work with Java Web Start.
I hope that helps. My original suspicions (that WebStart does support applets) is now confirmed.
Cheers!
First, I'd like to take issue with your comment about portability. Applets suck from a portability standpoint because Netscape has a stuffed implementation of the JVM. Use Sun's Java Plug-In. It works nice. And Java on almost every platform (even Mac, with MacOS X, but not yet BeOS) is pretty good. However...
.jar files on the web. If you're not connected, no problem--you just use the older .jar files. If you don't want to upgrade, find--you just click "no" when it asks you if you want the latest .jar files. Since the .jar files are cached locally, there's no horrendous download every time you run the application (as with applets). It's extremely easy to set up your application to be WebStart-enabled. And, I believe (but don't quote me on this one) that you can make your applets WebStart-enabled, too (adding caching to applets).
Take a look at Sun's Java WebStart. It looks to be Sun's successor to applet technology.
The idea is basically to create a web-enabled application. It allows you to create full blown Java applications. Every time you run a WebStart application, it checks to see if there are updates for the
This might offend some of the readers of slashdot, but I don't think this comment was intended to be flamebait. At any rate, I think a lot of what the author was saying is *correct*.
Just because a message does not agree with yours does not make it flamebait.
I'm not sure what you mean when you say, "why do they continue to let WIPO take the actions that they do." ICANN is not in the business of policing WIPO. It is not their job.
However, this has gotten way off topic. If you want to carry this on further, e-mail me. My e-mail address is valid.
Cheers!
I am not trying to redefine the First Amendment. I am merely conveying the interpretation of the First Amendment handed down by our Supreme Court. This is how meaning is attached to our Articles of the Constitution. This is how our democracy works. Are you trying to redefine the First Amendment through??
As for disregarding wipo.org.uk, I said I was sorry. I meant it.
And as for my statement about ICANN, they have indeed taken this position. Now, that doesn't stop trademark holders from attempting to bully domain holders. Nor does it stop domain holders from giving in to their bullying. But it *is* their policy.
Cheers!
I'm sorry. I didn't read the wipo.org.uk site beyond the name. The name, "World Intellectual Piracy Organization", really did little for me than to discredit the idea. I am sorry for that; I should have read further.
But, please, don't go off on the First Amendment. TLDs really have nothing to do with that. As I stated in my prior reply, ICANN has already taken the stance that trademarks != rights to a TLD.
I'm sorry that an American citizen has to point that out to you. It's a shame, really, as I am currently a British resident. And it's rare that I come across a British citizen that is more arrogant and offensive than us Americans. I take my hat off to you for that.
Cheers!
Hmmm...Let's see. (20 celsius * 9/5) + 32 = 68 fahrenheit....
or, the Back Of the Envelope calculation, 20*2 + 30 = 70. That's at least one you can do in your head....
Sorry to quibble about this, but I hate it when people get simple conversions wrong.
You do realize that two companies in completely unrelated industries can share the same trademark, don't you? Look at the word trademark. A mark for a trade. For a specific trade. Trademarks only apply to the trade within which the business does work. Of course, if your business is sufficiently common, such as McDonalds (tm), the trademark can be successfully defended outside the trade. However, this is a fairly rare occurance in IP law. As an example, the word, "Nova", is trademarked by both General Motors (their car, the "no go", as it is translated from Spanish) and PBS (the science-oriented television show). Both were awarded trademarks because they are in completely different trades, and as such the trademarks would not be confused with one another.
.REG TLD simply won't work. ICANN holds the position that top level domains != trademarks. Now, WIPO is in the business of defending IP. So, if there is some ambiguity, they will try to help enforce the rights of the IP holder. But your argument simply doesn't hold water.
As a result, how should the ICANN deal with two companies that wish to register the same domain name? They might both own the trademark to that name, but in different industries? Your suggestion for a
And, for the record, free speech laws in America do not include the right to slander a company or to dilute the efficacy of a trademark. This is fairly well established (i.e. I don't think the courts will be overturning precedent any time soon). An exception to this exception is in the case of satire (one of the strongest forms of free speech in America, I might add). This is because satire cannot be confused with serious dialogue; as such, satire does not constitute slander.
Cheers!
Now, as I understood it, WIPO does not have a policy of forcing the foreiture of domain names to trademark owners. They will do this, but it is not their policy.
There are accepted means of referencing web sites in academia. Just reference the website. If you're so arrogant to think your thesis will be read >6 months after you've graduated, then write the authors to see if you can have permission to include the text as an appendix. But, still, reference the website.
Mine was almost twice that, with a real preexisting condition. That's not a horrible price.
Having them on file is not a risk...having them on file *unencrypted* is a risk.
I got the e-mail from Egghead. And my card *was* used fraudulently on Nov. 6. I don't know if the two were related, but I strongly doubt Egghead's claims.
Except that it falls under a Microsoft patent. Stylesheets, both XSL and CSS, were patented by Microsoft.
This guy has no clue. Carnegie Mellon is 10x the undergraduate university that MIT will ever be, at least in terms of the education it provides (there's something to be said about living in Boston instead of Pittsburg).
Look, I knew a couple of guys (one CS, one Mech E) that transferred from my school (Rice) to MIT. They both said their workloads dropped considerably, while their grades rose. They were very aware of the fact that they weren't getting the same education that they were getting at Rice. But, MIT has the name.
And one thing I've realized since I've graduated. There are only two other schools I've come across where the grads are as competent as my peers at Rice (truth be told, most of us Rice guys are complete goons socially, though). One is CMU. The other is Harvey Mudd College.
Just my $.02
Yep. We did the same project at Rice Uiversity. Working with Yalnix. Given CMU's lead in kernel design, I'd suspect Rice modelled their course after CMU's. Great course, really. Between this and the compiler course (we built a funtional compiler), I have a much firmer understanding of what goes on under the covers. It was a bitch at the time, but I'm damned glad I have it under my belt now.
Hmm... A few examples from the XML world come to mind. XSL (MS has the patent, but has agreed to allow anyone to use it for free, and turned it over to W3C). XML Schemas (another MS invention that is now in the hands of W3C). SOAP (again...).
Look, MS has a long history of being the bad guys in a lot of areas. But XML is not one of those areas.
XML has some real deficiencies dealing with large binary data (I do a lot of work in the oil industry with seismic data, where a single data set can be hundreds of gigabytes). MS is trying to address this area, too, along with IBM (SOAP). Yeah, they're going to push the envelope with XML. If they didn't, we wouldn't have XSL and XML Schemas today. And if we were talking about any issue other than XML, I'd say this is probably a bad thing. But they have a real commitment in the XML world towards open standards bodies (W3C). Take it for face value. It's a good thing, for once...
Stand a marketing person and a programmer back to back. Give them each guns, tell them to take 10 steps each, turn, and shoot. :-P
My favorite quote on this subject goes something like, "HTML is not a subset of XML any more than a car is a subset of steel." XML is a meta-markup langauge--a language for describing markup languages. HTML is a markup language. HTML can be expressed as XML, but is not a subset of XML.